Running the ball next year

[Luth4Cy]

The recievers struggle to block because they are undersized. It's not thier wheelhouse. We need some larger possesion recievers not just for matchups on the slant and fade but run blocking. And yes we need to run more than the zone read.

I'm not sure I agree with that. At times Jarvis seems like our best blocking receiver. In saying that I thought we missed Reynolds blocking this year.

Running more than the zone read seems so simple to me and I don't know why the coaches refuse to do it. With a mobile quarterback why not more option pitches and triple options. It does seem to me though at times like they are trying to downsize the number of traditional zone reads called and begin to call more run pass options.

[KFitzy87]

I don't know why you'd be so dismissive of CD's post. Guy obviously cares about ISU football and wants to talk about it. AND, the OC did in fact promise upon his promotion to run the ball more. He did this knowing full well what talent he had returning. Did he follow through? I don't think so.

Nothing wrong with a fan wanting to talk about this in earnest. If you don't want to read, don't. No need to post a pr*ckist gif and then attack a guy that calls you on it.

PS: Yes, I know ... lighten up, Francis.

Lighten up, Francis.

[Aclone]

I understand that most people realize we need to run the ball better. I'm just wondering what people's thoughts were on why we've been so bad at it, and what can be done to fix it?

A. We weren't physically dominant.

B. Shaban Dika was hurt and missed the entire season. He should have been one of our two most physical linemen on the inside.

C. The other of the two "physical linemen" was Ethan Tuftee, who was injured midseason. You might have noticed that he was playing on one leg the rest of the season, alternating series with Bob Graham--and there was an, um, bit of a dropoff...

D. Kyle Lichtenberg had a high center of gravity for playing inside. In other words, he's naturally a tackle, protecting against edge rushers, and kept getting blown off the ball.

E. As a freshman, Tom Farniok needed help from a guard inside. This season as a soph, he should have been the guy to help one of the guards. But once Tuftee was injured, does he help the guy on his left, or his right?

Without going any further, is that a good enough start for you?

[heitclone]

I disagree with your assessment on the running backs by saying they are overrated, because I they can each have a good day rushing on any given day. However, the coaching staff needs to put the running back in a position where they can succeed. In my arm chair coaching opinion, I would like to see one running back for a few plays before being subbed out so the RB can get in some sort of rhythm.

I agree, they RB's aren't overrated, because who thinks they are great? We have servicable backs but I don't think its a stretch to say as a group, ours are among the weakest in our conference. I think White and Woody compliment each other well and like you said, the coaching staff doesn't do them any favors from a subbing and playcalling standpoint. I hate to say it but Shontrelle has hit his ceiling (he hasn't been the same since getting hurt), he tries to stretch everything outside and spends way too much time running sideways trying to get the corner. He has more talent than White but White is a much smarter runner and takes what the defense gives him. At the least SJ needs a year to get healthy and get his confidence back. This RB group looked like one of the better groups in our league before the season started but they just fizzled. The coaching staff bringing in a juco back speaks volumes IMO.

[Cyclonic1]

We need a better offensive line, and yes of course we need to run the ball effectively. There are my thoughts. Problem solved!

We could always use more speed in the backfield IMO. That's one thing that I really noticed in watching the other bowl games - it seems almost every winning team had better team speed than ISU.
I confess that when we get a new commit I notice the stars, other offers and size but seldom do I pay much attention to speed.
Did we get any speedsters in the 2013 commits? Any that red shirted this year?

[Aclone]

We could always use more speed in the backfield IMO. That's one thing that I really noticed in watching the other bowl games - it seems almost every winning team had better team speed than ISU.
I confess that when we get a new commit I notice the stars, other offers and size but seldom do I pay much attention to speed.
Did we get any speedsters in the 2013 commits? Any that red shirted this year?

Aaron Wimberly certainly has speed, the JC back who has already signed, but I'd consider him more athletic and elusive than a "blazer". Of course, HS commit Tyler Brown looks like he has the speed to go all the way, kind of a cross between James White and ARob, IMO, but I'm not sure that "speed" is the only issue. There's also blocking, including downfield blocking, as already mentioned above, and the fact of finding a dominant-type back.

[clonedude]

I agree, they RB's aren't overrated, because who thinks they are great? We have servicable backs but I don't think its a stretch to say as a group, ours are among the weakest in our conference. I think White and Woody compliment each other well and like you said, the coaching staff doesn't do them any favors from a subbing and playcalling standpoint. I hate to say it but Shontrelle has hit his ceiling (he hasn't been the same since getting hurt), he tries to stretch everything outside and spends way too much time running sideways trying to get the corner. He has more talent than White but White is a much smarter runner and takes what the defense gives him. At the least SJ needs a year to get healthy and get his confidence back. This RB group looked like one of the better groups in our league before the season started but they just fizzled. The coaching staff bringing in a juco back speaks volumes IMO.

Yeah, I think bringing in Wimberly says a LOT about what the coaching staff thinks about our RBs right now. Our RBs are ok, but definitely not difference makers by any means. I think they are hoping that Wimberly can battle James White for the starting job.

[cydline2cydline]

Imo the offensive scheme works. Spread em out and get a numbers advantage. Teams are neutralizing this with more defenders in the box. Then the offense doesnt work, so we need to pass to get our advantage back but we dont pass as well, and teams know this. So the defense tells us what we are going to do instead of us doing it.

[2020cy]

He lost me at rented step mule.

[ShopTalk]

A. We weren't physically dominant.

Without going any further, is that a good enough start for you?

Please continue - the O-line is where it all starts, but when does ISU get WR's with the size and strength to block at the next level and who steps up at O-line next year to give whoever runs the ball a chance?

And for running the ball, I would like to see a more physical back like Woody or Wimberly running it if there isn't much help from o-line because they can at least lay a block of their own on the first would be tackler and get a few more yards. All the smaller faster backs get mugged at los or in backfield and that's it without a clear running lane.

All it takes is 3.5 yards for three carries for a first down and if they can do that consistently, that runs the clock and scores points. Problems is, that's not B12 points and next year, going to need video game scores to help out a young and inexperienced D with major holes to fill.

[nickcyv]

Yeah, I think bringing in Wimberly says a LOT about what the coaching staff thinks about our RBs right now. Our RBs are ok, but definitely not difference makers by any means. I think they are hoping that Wimberly can battle James White for the starting job.

A couple things. I remember when the staff brought in SJ. He was the difference maker that we needed according to them and he has been our best back at times, but he is far from dominant. Short answer I agree with you that Wimberly may very well be our best back next year.

Also, Farniok is a soph.

[CyCy]

I can remember when Walden decided to convert to a running offense.

In 1994 we rushed 507 times and passed 206 times. Finished 0-10-1. I guess converting to a running game doesn't help much unless you have talent.

[dualthreat]

we lacked down hill road graders on the O-line. coupled with our inability to complete passes down the field efficiently enough to prevent the defense from stacking the box and selling out against the run.

The defenses who were able to match up with our WR really gave us fits: (Rutgers), Iowa, Tech, OSU, also KSU and OU at times.

[CyCloned]

Imo the offensive scheme works. Spread em out and get a numbers advantage. Teams are neutralizing this with more defenders in the box. Then the offense doesnt work, so we need to pass to get our advantage back but we dont pass as well, and teams know this. So the defense tells us what we are going to do instead of us doing it.

This offense is a train wreck, and anyone that can not see that needs to take another look. Defenses are loading up the box on every down, bringing guys off the edge and blowing it up before it gets started. The Zone read is not going to work when teams plug the middle and bring a guy off either edge. Maybe, and it is a big maybe, but if the passing game can at least be some type of threat to burn teams over the top the other teams will back off enough to create a running game. Better OL play would help too, but most of what I saw last year was a team that was outnumbered at the point of attack.

I would still like to see a little bit of pro set, run right at them offense. Not every down, but shift into it just to give the other defense something different to defend. As it is now defenses know exactly what ISU is going to do in the running game and waiting to stop it.

[Luth4Cy]

This offense is a train wreck, and anyone that can not see that needs to take another look. Defenses are loading up the box on every down, bringing guys off the edge and blowing it up before it gets started. The Zone read is not going to work when teams plug the middle and bring a guy off either edge. Maybe, and it is a big maybe, but if the passing game can at least be some type of threat to burn teams over the top the other teams will back off enough to create a running game. Better OL play would help too, but most of what I saw last year was a team that was outnumbered at the point of attack.

I would still like to see a little bit of pro set, run right at them offense. Not every down, but shift into it just to give the other defense something different to defend. As it is now defenses know exactly what ISU is going to do in the running game and waiting to stop it.

When teams load the box though it's pretty simple that the play should be changed to a short pass or pass run option instead of a traditional zone read. In any form of an offense teams loading the box against the run will be an issue, that's why the run sets up the pass and the pass sets up the run. The fact that no matter what offense we run we will have to throw down field some proves that the system is not the problem. Although I do agree with you that we should go under center some. A single back set every once in a while or even a pistol would be a helpful change of pace.